Reporting the courts in the 21st Century

Journalist and Freedom of Information campaigner Heather Brooke (pictured) has sparked a debate on modern court reporting by asking whether court cases should be allowed to be recorded by journalists.

It seems to have polarised opinion: some journalists argue that it is the natural progression, allowing for more accurate reporting, and could go further - tweeting and live blogging for example; others say that going as far as using twitter and the like could endanger the practice of fair and accurate reporting if it were swamped with opinionated blogging and snippets of information.

Here are a selection of comments so far:

Heather Brooke: "The simple answer is to allow tape recorders for all: no party is disadvantaged and an ‘official’ recording is there for checking. This is how it works in other countries. But this is to ignore the root objection of the courts: that they are losing control of how court proceedings are presented to the public.

"Many trials in the upper courts are now officially recorded (and in the case of the new UK Supreme Court, filmed) yet these records are not accessible to the public. All High Court hearings have been digitally recorded since February 2010 and sit in a basement in the Royal Courts of Justice. When I spoke to the court’s governance officer he told me there were no plans to make these accessible directly to the public. Why not?"

Siobhain Butterworth, The Guardian: "There is something rather quaint about journalists in the 21st century using pens and notebooks to record what goes on in court hearings when the tools of the trade now include laptops, mobiles, BlackBerrys and other digital paraphernalia. Why not use them in court? In fact, why not report live from the courtroom? The obvious answer is that judges won't let you.

"The difference between scribbling notes (publishing later) and filing copy instantly from the courtroom using an electronic device is self-evidently slight and there's a lot to be said for the sort of full, accurate, contemporaneous, reports of court hearings that live-blogs and twitter reporting could achieve."

Mike Dodd, Editor, Media Law: "You'd need to trial it, to see how it worked. I'd be very suspicious about tweeting - I'm not sure that court cases are the sort of thing where you'd want to put out short, pithy messages."

(Quoted in Siobhain Butterworth's article)

Steve Dyson, Media Consultant and former Editor, Birmingham Mail: "No, no and no again. Why not? Only by insisting on accurate, balanced, fair and contemporaneous reports can court coverage be reasoned, calm(ish) and not damaging to justice. Wild snippets as tweets, opinionated blogs and even edited broadcasts will make a mockery of something very precious.

"Live broadcasts, maybe, but courts cannot be subjected to the unhindered internet media. Yes, a pencil and dated notebook sounds archaic but, do you know what, it works; it engenders care; it encourages factual checks; as does the process from reporter to newsdesk to sub... For legal checks on court copy. Let's not get shoddy."

(Commenting on Jon Slattery's blog post on this topic)

What do you think? Should court cases be recorded? Should we go further and start tweeting and blogging in court?

Should journalists' social media use be policed by the PCC?

The Press Complaints Commission's code of conduct is usually standard practice for most newspapers and the development of online content has already provided grey areas for lawyers but Leicester Mercury editor Keith Perch has questioned the role of the PCC, on his blog, when it comes to journalists' use of social media.

He is quick to explain that the scope would be for the professional use of such tools- such as linking to work done for a particular publication - treating it in the same way as a newspaper columnist and therefore personal use would not be included.

Quoting an email he sent to his journalists asking for their views, Perch writes: "As a columnist, the journalist gets far more freedom and is able to express an opinion. However, as a columnist their work is subject to my editing. I reserve the right to edit their posts.

"In practice, I never see their posts until after they have been published, but staff know that I am reviewing them and, therefore, I believe, they take this into consideration before publication."

Perch is inviting people to debate the issue on his blog. What do you think? Should Twitter feeds, official Facebook pages and the like come under the remit of the PCC?

(via Jon Slattery)

Study: Online and Social media boosted coverage of General Election

The televised leaders’ debates may have been the main talking point of the 2010 General Election but a new study highlighted by journalism.co.uk suggests that mainstream coverage was “enriched” by the use of online and social media.

The report, 'UK election 2010: mainstream media and the role of the internet: how social and digital media affected the business of politics and journalism', written by the co-founder of the BBC News website Nic Newman is the result of interviews conducted with more than 20 journalists, political bloggers and founders of political websites.

In a release to mark today’s launch of the report, Newman states how the results show that Twitter in particular has become a "core communication tool" in political and media circles.

With more than 600 party political candidates using the service during the election, it became "an essential source of real-time information for journalists and politicians", he says.

The Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ) also conducted a survey of more than 200 18-24-year-olds, as part of the study, which suggested that "unprecedented levels of participation" with the general election were a result of increased social media coverage.

The use of social media tools by journalists and mainstream news sites, such as liveblogs and digital correspondents, "helped to amplify the impact of social media even further" on this age group, says the study.

Friday round up

A selection of digital stories to see you through the weekend.

Tweetminster launches Media Watch channel

The people behind MP tweet-monitoring service Tweetminster have launched a new aggregation service for tracking UK News media, reports Journalism.co.uk.

The Media Watch channel is the latest in a number of launches for the site which also includes health, economy and environment channels.

The homepage of the channel has a "livestream" that includes all Twitter accounts of mainstream media sources and updates as they update.

Alberto Nardelli, Tweetminster founder, told Journalism.co.uk: "The idea behind channels is to make it easier for people to follow news, see what's trending in each topic or within each source, and also make it easier for people to connect with those driving the conversations.

"The longer term goal is an interactive wire - we'll be developing further channels around issues, networks, events and locations and also soon releasing APIs and feeds."

Five free SEO Tools for journalists

Many journalists see Search Engine Optimisation as "the equivalent of writing headlines for robots", writes Alfred Hermida.


But, he points out, it is key to helping readers find what they are looking for. He then provides five free SEO tools that can help journalists make their work easier to find on the web.


These include WordTracker FreeKeywords which provides alternative keyword suggestions with a weighting to indicate their use, and Google Trends which analyses Google searches and works out how many searches have been done for the terms you enter.





Survey reveals digital journalism is tough going but has lots of opportunity

Finally, The Guardian's PDA Blog has a summary of the annual Oriella digital journalism survey.

From the 770 journalists surveyed (from 15 countries around the globe including the UK), around 46% of journalists said they were expected to produce more work, 30% said they are working longer hours and 28% have less time to research stories.

But some 40% said they believed the web provided new opportunities with many looking at Smartphone applications and paywalls as possible streams of revenue. Twitter is also important with 41% running a Twitter feed.

Should Twitter be taught in J-School?

Alfred Hermida highlights an interesting question in his Reportr blog - should journalism students learn to use Twitter as part of their studies?

It's a question he says is under discussion at the World Journalism Education Congress being held in South Africa. Julie Posetti from the University of Canberra is one of the academics arguing for its inclusion. He shared this YouTube clip:



It's an interesting question to consider - it has clear benefits such as learning to drive traffic to your articles, or how to expose stories of interest (such as the Trafigura scandal) and identify story tip-offs, along with the potential dangers of doing so - surely then it's important to grasp the role of Twitter within your journalism career as soon as possible?

But the question arises that can this skill be taught? Or is it something you learn through trial and error?

To follow this and other discussions from the conference, you can follow its Twitter hashtag #WJEC2 or watch live feeds on the on the conference’s site.

How the New York Times football tracker could help journalists with effective targeting

It may all seem like a bit of pointless fun, but the New York Times' football tracker could indicate a way to tailor your content based on what your readers are most interested in.

In something similar to Twitter trending topics, the simple, interactive tool tracks the amount of discussion each team player attracts on Facebook and then creates a graphic based on the resulting numbers. The larger their picture, the more talk there is about them.

For example, Robert Green's infamous football fumbling resulted in him being the player most discussed on June 14th. Likewise, an uninspired performance from England against Algeria on the 18th gave Wayne Rooney the top spot.

Interestingly, perhaps suggesting that the discussions aren't entirely focused on the players' performance on the pitch, Christiano Ronaldo has dominated the tracker. As Portugal were eliminated from the tournament at the end of June, perhaps his continued presence is due to his reported Facebook announcement regarding his new role as a dad.

It's great for both the most obsessive of footy fans who dont want to miss a trick and those who have little interest in football but may want to keep up with the watercooler chats.

Arguably, it's also a good way of sport writers and editors keeping track of who and what is catching the attention of their readers which could allow them to tweak their content accordingly. It certainly gives pause for thought.

A tale of caution

We start this week with a reminder that breaking news can be a dangerous career move. The Tabloid Watch blog is just one of many highlighting the resultant egg-on-face for hapless Daily Mail hack Richard Ashmore.

Ashmore fell foul of a spoof Twitter account set up for Apple CEO Steve Jobs and wrote a story based on one of the tweets. Not only did he apparently fail to spot the disclaimer, pointing out that the account was a parody, but also apparently failed to bother to check any basic facts with Apple themselves.

The article was swiftly removed when the error was pointed out. Now, it seems fairly clear that Ashmore has been a bit of a plonker for seemingly failing to do even the most basic of factchecking, but surely it also reminds us about the fine balance between good quality journalism and stealing a march on your competitors in a 24/7 digital age.

At a time where redundancies are rife and getting audiences for your advertisers seems paramount, you can feel a little spark of sympathy for someone thinking they'd managed to break what would have been a major scoop if only it were, um, even vaguely true.

So whilst Ashmore will probably have derisive laughter echoing in his ears for quite some time, perhaps we should take on board the lesson of the dire consequences when either time pressures or plain laziness stop you from doing your job properly.